[gnasher]

jdonn, on Sep 2 2008, 10:17 PM, said:

The same place you will after any type of invitation.

So presumably you're going to play 4♠ with

   AKJ10x Ax xxx Jxx  opposite  Qxx KQ9xxx x Qxx

and also with

   AKJ10x Ax xxx Jxx  opposite  Qxx x Qxx KQ9xxx

I'm glad you redefined the word "perfect" earlier - if we do a bit more work on it we can use it to describe the final contract on the second pair of hands.

Quote

I'm glad to see you seem to agree with the meat of what I posted since you only replied to my hasty example.

I can't imagine why you think that. The fact that I have nothing to add to my original opinion doesn't mean that this opinion has changed. If something that someone has said persuades me to change my mind about something, I usually say so.

I do, in fact, agree with part of what you said: it is true that bidding notrumps followed by spades doesn't show a 3613 9-count. I also have no reason to doubt your assertions about which aspects of your "perfect" sequence bother you and which do not.

[kgr]

han, on Sep 2 2008, 08:08 PM, said:

skaeran, on Sep 2 2008, 08:26 AM, said:

han, on Sep 2 2008, 02:58 PM, said:

Come one guys, this is the SAYC and 2/1 forum and the methods were specified in the poll. It is useless to state the perfect methods for this hand, even if you happen to play them.

Well, there's an 'other' option in the poll. And I'm playing 2/1.
Thus I voted 'other' and explained why. WTF?

No need to wtf Harald . It is clear from the poll options that kgr wants to know what you would bid giving the methods he was playing and your 2S bid is not part of it.

where do you get that from

[ArtK78]

It seems to me that in SAYC you can bid 2♥ followed by 3♠ invitational if you are so inclined.

That happens to be a part of my methods, which are not SAYC. I haven't decided yet whether I want to aim for such a small target.

I am surprised, however, that both players holding this hand just blasted 4♠. Were they playing strong club systems? Slam is certainly not out of the question. Slam is likely to make opposite AKxxxx Ax xx Axx or any similar hand with good spades and the rounded suit aces.

[gwnn]

ArtK78, on Sep 3 2008, 09:53 PM, said:

It seems to me that in SAYC you can bid 2♥ followed by 3♠ invitational if you are so inclined.

2♥ then 3♠ is GF and not invitational in SAYC. The only bid which looks like a raise but is not GF after a 2/1 is 1M-2x; 2y-2M, which is a doubleton preference and is not forcing.

[han]

kgr, on Sep 2 2008, 06:35 PM, said:

han, on Sep 2 2008, 08:08 PM, said:

skaeran, on Sep 2 2008, 08:26 AM, said:

han, on Sep 2 2008, 02:58 PM, said:

Come one guys, this is the SAYC and 2/1 forum and the methods were specified in the poll. It is useless to state the perfect methods for this hand, even if you happen to play them.

Well, there's an 'other' option in the poll. And I'm playing 2/1.
Thus I voted 'other' and explained why. WTF?

No need to wtf Harald . It is clear from the poll options that kgr wants to know what you would bid giving the methods he was playing and your 2S bid is not part of it.

where do you get that from

Hmm, seems I confused you with bb79. My apologies or congratulations depending on the skill levels of both of you.

[gnasher]

gwnn, on Sep 3 2008, 09:33 PM, said:

2♥ then 3♠ is GF and not invitational in SAYC.

Are you sure about that? This is from the SAYC booklet:

Quote

SUBSEQUENT BIDDING BY RESPONDER
...
Bids available for inviting game: 2NT, 3 of a previously bid suit
...
If responder initially bids a new suit at the two level, the same rules apply EXCEPT that a subsequent jump raise of opener’s first suit to the THREE LEVEL is game forcing

1♠-2♥; 2♠-3♠ isn't a jump, so it appears that it's non-forcing.

[bb79]

han, on Sep 3 2008, 04:25 PM, said:

kgr, on Sep 2 2008, 06:35 PM, said:

han, on Sep 2 2008, 08:08 PM, said:

skaeran, on Sep 2 2008, 08:26 AM, said:

han, on Sep 2 2008, 02:58 PM, said:

Come one guys, this is the SAYC and 2/1 forum and the methods were specified in the poll. It is useless to state the perfect methods for this hand, even if you happen to play them.

Well, there's an 'other' option in the poll. And I'm playing 2/1.
Thus I voted 'other' and explained why. WTF?

No need to wtf Harald . It is clear from the poll options that kgr wants to know what you would bid giving the methods he was playing and your 2S bid is not part of it.

where do you get that from

Hmm, seems I confused you with bb79. My apologies or congratulations depending on the skill levels of both of you.

It's highly likely that you'll need to send apologies to kgr

Burak

[benlessard]

Quote

This was from Cayne vs Stars match I was kibitzing, and both Souths bid 4♠ directly

If the opening is limited 4S is a perfectly normal bid at imps. im repeating myself but red at imps it doesnt pay to stop at 3M.

[bb79]

benlessard, on Sep 3 2008, 06:46 PM, said:

Quote

This was from Cayne vs Stars match I was kibitzing, and both Souths bid 4♠ directly

If the opening is limited 4S is a perfectly normal bid at imps. im repeating myself but red at imps it doesnt pay to stop at 3M.

Looking at the other boards they played, neither looks like playing strong club. In another board, they both opened 1S with KJxxxx, AQx AK xx. They play 1C 3C preemptive (inv minors). I believe their system is most likely to be somewhere close to 2/1 (hence the forum location) .

[Lobowolf]

benlessard, on Sep 3 2008, 06:46 PM, said:

Quote

im repeating myself but red at imps it doesnt pay to stop at 3M.

Gotta disagree with this one. There are still IMPs to be gained from going +140/+100. Some hands worth investigating game on (i.e. going beyond 2M) can gain by recognizing below the game level that it's not worth going to 4M on. If not, you're not getting enough effectiveness out of your game tries.

[jdonn]

Lobowolf, on Sep 3 2008, 06:59 PM, said:

Quote

im repeating myself but red at imps it doesnt pay to stop at 3M.

Gotta disagree with this one. There are still IMPs to be gained from going +140/+100. Some hands worth investigating game on (i.e. going beyond 2M) can gain by recognizing below the game level that it's not worth going to 4M on. If not, you're not getting enough effectiveness out of your game tries.

I think his point, which is very fair, is that game being good or bad will depend more on how well the hands fit, and not so much on the overall strength. But the only invitation we can offer (in 2/1) is one based on overall strength. So under those circumstances it doesn't make sense to just hope the hands fit badly when vul at imps.

The general argument is fine, but I still don't think the hand is good enough to do anything but invite. Partner is most likely to be short in hearts, and my singleton has a lot less value with three trumps than with four. Partner had a hand on which some would accept a limit raise (granted a dreadful diamond holding opposite shortness), and game had absolutely no play.

If you were going to bid game anyway I STRONGLY believe 2♥ is right. There could easily be slam with the right fit, such as AKxxxx Axx xxx x. I don't see much gain in just blasting the auction, as there seems to be enough defense to hope the opponents can't make anything, actual hand notwithstanding (and in a sense, 2♥ is more preemptive than 4♠).

[mikeh]

Given that this is in the 2/1 forum (as well as standard), I think I would bid 1N, hoping to hear 2♣ over which many 2/1 players, including me, could usefully bid 2♦ as BART: if partner has 2-3 hearts, he will bid 2♥ and I can then choose either to bid 4♥ or 3♥. If he rebids 2♠, instead, showing nothing special while denying as many as 2 hearts, I will raise him to 3♠.

If not playing BART, then I bid 1N then 3♠, recognizing that I may miss some well-fitting games, but also recognizing that partner will strain to accept.

[gwnn]

gnasher, on Sep 4 2008, 01:01 AM, said:

gwnn, on Sep 3 2008, 09:33 PM, said:

2♥ then 3♠ is GF and not invitational in SAYC.

Are you sure about that? This is from the SAYC booklet:

Quote

SUBSEQUENT BIDDING BY RESPONDER
...
Bids available for inviting game: 2NT, 3 of a previously bid suit
...
If responder initially bids a new suit at the two level, the same rules apply EXCEPT that a subsequent jump raise of opener’s first suit to the THREE LEVEL is game forcing

1♠-2♥; 2♠-3♠ isn't a jump, so it appears that it's non-forcing.

Definitely sounds like that is invitational according to the booklet, it doesn't seem to make sense though, since with a limit raise with clubs or diamonds you need to just bid 3S (because over a new suit on the two level you are stuck). But 1M-2m-2M-3M is again invitational? wow...